tv Hardball With Chris Matthews MSNBC November 18, 2014 11:00pm-12:01am PST
choice. to find out more, go to giving tuesday.msnbc.com. chris hayes is up next. hardball "hardball" starts right now. victory. obama wins one. let's play hard ball. washington, let me start with one word, victory in the first big battle since the november election president obama's side has prevailed. the united states senate failed to reach the 60 votes required for approval. the measure is now dead for the current congress. this means that if the advocates get the pipeline approved they have to rely on the senate taking office this january. the big fights are on the immediate horizon. the president expected executive order and welcoming perhaps
millions of immigrants to illegal status to this country. the action is expected to explode within days or hours of the decision. it is a time of conflict and troubling time and important time to follow what is going on most importantly the facts of each issue. even as people see the manners of historic importance the devil will be in the details especially for those trying desperately to find the ground of truth that lies in the middle. democratic from massachusetts and republican from north carolina, the co-sponsor of the legislation, north dakota. let me start with you. you are a co-sponsor of the bill. why is it so important to the country that we have this pipeline completed? >> it's about energy. it's about jobs. it's baseball economic growth and an energy plan for the
country which is a national security issue. the american people support this project. every time it is polled 60% to 70% of the american public says build the pipeline. >> how many permanent jobs? >> the state department says about 42,000 jobs and -- >> permanent jobs. not building the pipeline but after it is built? >> 42,000 during construction, direct and indirect. unions across the country are supporting this project because they want those jobs. >> i hear it is 35 jobs after the pipeline is completed? is that accurate? >> if you are talking about jobs monitoring the pipeline that may be but there are other jobs on direct and indirect basis. the other thing about it is you are talking about the energy industry which is foundational to our other industry sectors. low cost dependable energy that we produce here makes all of our other sectors stronger and our
economy stronger in a global economy. >> where is the oil going to go that goes down through the pipeline? where will it go from the ultimate market after it goes from canada? >> according to department of energy report it will be used here in our country. that's not me saying it. that is the obama administration's department of energy. >> let me go to senator. why is it important not to build the pipeline? >> well, first of all, it's the dirtiest oil in the world. and then canada waupts to build a pipeline through the united states of america down into the gulf coast where their intention is to export that oil right out of our country. how do i know that? because i asked the canadian government and i asked the oil industry if they would accept the amendment to keep all of the oil in the united states and they said they would absolutely oppose it.
i brought that to vote twice on the floor of the congress. both times i was opposed by the oil industry and i lost. if we are going to be exporting young men and women to the mist in order to escort tankers of oil coming back from arab nations the least we should do if we are going to have a pipeline that goes through our country is that oil should stay in the united states of america. and at the same time we should also have to win. for energy efficiency and the republicans are killing the kind of incentives for alternative energy while supporting a pipeline out of our country for the dirtiest oil in the world. >> here is speaker boehner talking about this. he ripped into your side for the president's threat to veto the legislation if it passed tonight. here he is, john boehner. >> a keystone pipeline veto
would send the signal that this president has no interest in listening to the american people. vetoing an overwhelmingly popular bill would be an indication that he doesn't care about the american people's priorities. it would be equivalent of calling the american people stupid. >> do you think that is true that the patrol is calling american people stupid for believing in the pipeline. it seems 60% want the pipeline. a much higher percentage want gun control yet congress doesn't support gun control. what is this idea if you don't agree with somebody they are stupid. >> american public, 60% to 70% in poll after poll says they want the project approved. it really is about getting energy that we produce here in our country and working with our closest friends and ally canada. remember the oil in this pipeline is not only for canada but states like north dakota which produces 1.2 million
barrels a day. this pipeline will replace 1,400 rail cards a day that are clogging up our railroads and it displaces oil that we are bringing in from places like venezuela which has the same carbon foot print or higher. even crews in california have the same greenhouse gas emissions. it makes sure we don't have to depend on the middle east for oil. that is why the american public supports it. >> it is more complicated. the speaker says the president is calling the people stupid and called opponents no brainers. >> i said approving it is a no brainer. i'm not calling anybody stupid. i am being very careful to make sure i don't. >> to me it is so simple. it seems like the president veto will hold next year because i look to the numbers there are
only four switches of senate seats that had gone to the pro pipeline position. it seems they won't get the 67. they are not going to get the 290 members. do you think he should veto next year? >> yes i do. until we discuss this issue rationalry. the last 355 months of temperatures on the planet have been warmer than the average meaning that if you're 29 years old in the united states of america you have never known a month where global warming was not intensifying. so this is a big debate. it's not just about climate change. it's about keeping energy in the united states here and not allowing the canadians to export it. it is about our national security. we are still importing today just about the same amount as we did 40 years ago when we put the ban on crude oil exports on the
books. so we need a big debate here. and it has to include wind and solar, energy efficiency, all the things the republicans in this congress have blocked from going through. if you are going to have a debate it can't be just about oil above oil. it has to be about all of the above. you have to have every energy issue out there. the republicans just want to do the business of the fossil fuel industry. if you are the koch brothers you are in kansas and look at the prairies and see the instruction of your business model because wind power is coming. they want to kill it and keep us addicted to coal and other fossil fuels. we need a big debate. the next generation, the younger generation demands that we have this debate for their children and their grandchildren. >> it sounds like we hearing from the "new york times" the need for some kind of deal here. is there going to be some kind of larger energy issue? you are saying you have a key road here. >> we are absolutely going to bring this up next year. we are going to have more than
60 votes and we may get to even 67 votes. >> you need 290 in the house, as well. >> understand there is a number of options here. we could combine it with other energy legislation or work with an appropriations measure. we are going to get there. we are picking up more -- >> what will you give up to get the 290 in the house and 67 in the senate? you know you are going to have to negotiate to get more votes. you don't have the 67 in your own body. >> there are people on both sides of the aisle talking about working with us on legislation which we may combine with this bill to get to the 67 vote threshled. i want to respond to something. if you want an all of the above energy plan really you have to build the infrastructure to do it. that means pipeline and rail and road.
i would invite him to come to my state where we not only do oil and gas and coal but wind and bio fuels and we do bio mass and renewables as well as fossil fuels. you have to have the infrastructure to get it done. >> if you want all of the above you have to bring the wind in off the prairies. you have to bring it in off of the coast line. you have to be deploying solar panels. what the republicans are doing right now is holding up the extension of the tax credit which led to the creation of 80,000 jobs in this country in the production of new wind turbines. we have 142,000 people in the solar industry. there are only 70,000 coal minors. 80,000 in wind. and yet these tax breaks could be dead on december 31 of this year. that's really what this debate is all about. it's not all of the above. it's about oil above all. everything that was just mentioned goes to infrastructure for the fossil fuel industry. you never hear them saying let's
pass the tax breaks for renewable energy industry. >> i know north dakota is lucky in fuel and wind. why wouldn't you support this measure? >> i think it is very likely that that will be included as part of the tax extender package. i believe we need to get a package done before the end of the year. what we believe in as republicans is that you produce all of the above by encouraging investment and not holding up permits for six years so that the industry can't invest billions of dollars to put the latest greatest technology out there not only to produce more energy but do it with better environmental stewardship. >> building a pipeline to send oil out of the united states makes no sense as it warms the planet dangerously. that is just the bottom line on this debate. >> thank you very much. coming up in the wake of the
isis horror the obama administration is reviewing its hostage policy. that's pretty interesting. and it won't change the policy of paying ransoms. what will be the new policy? is the current policy the right one? should the u.s. government pay to bring hostages home or should families be allowed to pay ransom to free their own loved ones. it is a hot debate and coming up next on "hardball."
help landrieu down there. could be a question of blood flow. cialis for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment is right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is also the only daily ed tablet approved to treat symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any symptoms of an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a free 30-tablet trial.
a broader mix of energies, world needs which is why we are supplying natural gas, to generate cleaner electricity, that has around 50% fewer co2 emissions than coal. and why with our partner in brazil, we are producing a biofuel made from renewable sugarcane to fuel cars. let's broaden the world's energy mix, let's go. mand i'm a troubleman for pg&e. i've been with pg&e for 17 years and i work in vallejo. i grew up in vallejo and this is where i want to be. i ride my truck around on the same hills i rode my bike around when i was a kid. as a troubleman, if your power goes out, you call and here i am. i feel like my job is important because all the people in this community are people that i know. my family is vallejo too so i need to make sure it's safe for them. when i pull up to a house, i want customers to know i'm there to help. we need to get the power back on, that's our job. you get a good feeling from fixing stuff.
welcome back to "hard ball." there are reports that the white house ordered a review of how united states deals with americans being held hostage. the most aspect is the insistence that the u.s. does not pay ransom to terrorists. the families of american journalists were reportedly advised by someone in the white house they could be prosecuted if they tried to pay a ransom. three of the four americans had been beheaded. the latest was a 26-year-old aid worker who was dedicated to helping victims of the syrian civil war. one american female aid worker remains captive. 15 others were released after their governments paid ransom. an average of $2.5 million according to the "new york times." should the united states reconsider the policy of not paying ransom? joan wallace and sarah short is a visiting scholar at uc berkeley.
she was held prisoner in iran for 410 days. i want to get to you in a moment, sarah. joan, what should be united states policy when someone there in the islamic state or anywhere in the east say we want x number of millions of dollars for the safe release of someone. >> i think we need to stick with the policy we have around ransom. i think isis is stitting on $125 million because they were able to get european countries to pay the ransom. the "new york times" did a fabulous investigation looking at the way al qaeda raised tens of millions from european nations and concluded that kidnapping europeans has become the primary business model for al qaeda. it goes into financing the
operations that we are trying to fight. so my heart goes out to the families of these people who have been murdered and my heart goes out to sarah, too, for what she endured and she may have a different point of view. i thipg what we do if we cave on this is create a bigger market for hostage taking. >> what happens if somebody has a lot of money and they say 6 million i will have the check in the mail tonight? should our law enforcement people criminalize that act? what should they say in that particular case? >> i have a problem with the idea that people are talking to grieving anxious terrified parents and threatening lawsuits or threatening prosecution. that seems heavy handed to me and seems like there are other ways to go about that.
on the other hand, if you let families willy-nilly if they have the means pony up their own ransoms then you are setting up a situation where if i don't have the money my daughter is murdered and somebody who is wealthy their daughter or son comes home intact. i don't pretend this is an easy issue. if i were a grieving horrified parent i would be doing everything in my power to bring her home. >> i believe you in everything because you make the point if it was you you would have a different perspective. >> tell me about your experience. take a minute or two or more and tell us your experience as a captive and the way you felt if you could overhear this conversation when you were in captivity what would you think about it? >> well, the way that i felt when i was being held hostage by the iranian government is that i didn't think it was likely that my government was going to do what the iranian government was asking of it. i didn't know what they were asking but i knew it probably had to do with the prisoner swap. i felt differently once i was released.
my release was negotiated by the government. it was a veiled ransom called a bail. after i was released my now husband and friend were still being held captive. i was at the center of the campaign and worked very closely with the government. eventually they paid another million dollars for my husband and friend. we were all freed. now, what i think is really important with this debate is that we start from the very honest place. the u.s. government says they don't pay ransom to get hostages freed. now, in my case the government paid the ransom but i know for a fact that they never would have taken that action without approval from the u.s. government. that is how politics work. the government did the u.s. government a favor and they will someday cash that in and get a favor in return. if the argument against paying ransom is that we don't want to
put money in the hands of groups like isis or al qaeda what difference does it make if the u.s. government is giving permission to third parties to pay ransom? the money is getting into those hands. in each of the cases there shouldn't be a blanket policy. the policy is obviously not working. there is an increase in these cases. >> you know what you are talking about here. what would work? the trouble people have is we can pay $5 million to get someone back. they will grab another westerner and ask for more. they will grab another american and ask. it's like a bubble gum machine. they are going to keep grabbing people. it is transaction without end. if we give them $100 million and never behead another person that might be a decent deal there. no more beheadings for 100 million. there is no end to it. it is kidnapping and it is blackmail and blackmailers never get enough never.
>> i do want to say in my mind there is a distinction between what sarah went through and the outcome of sarah's situation where the country of iran did something reprehensible and were suffering in the eyes of the world. it was a terrible thing that they did and shouldn't have done it and were presented with ways to get out of this mistake. now, are they great humanitarians? no. i think when you are dealing with a country that is part of the world community not our friends but we have diplomatic interests there and so do they, i think that is a slightly different situation. i want to be clear, to my knowledge and to the knowledge of western reporters the united states is not winking at anybody giving money or ransom to al qaeda or isis. i think sarah is absolutely right that they do wink sometimes in different sorts of situations but giving money specifically i think it is possible to draw a distinction between giving money in these awful situations and when you
are dealing with a state actor. i want to say i love your work on solitaire confinement. >> sarah, why don't you respond to what secretary of state john kerry as he defended the policy of not giving money. >> as for kidnapping, the united states has set a heart rending but absolutely necessary example by refusing to pay ransom for captured americans. all of the evidence shows that where and if a country is paid a ransom there are many more people who are taken hostage. >> your response? >> let's address the issue of the money. many reports show that the islamic state is making a million dollars a day from its so-called government and business activities. this terrorist group is not desperately in need of money the
way al qaeda is. $6.6 million would be a good day for isis but wouldn't make or break the organization. so i don't think that the money is as valuable to the islamic state as the propaganda is proven to be. it is escalated violence and gained them recruits. the vast, vast majority of muslims condemn and consider acts completely unislamic. there are a portion of radicals in arab countries like every country of the world that will be emboldened by the propaganda. my argument is that $6 million, $10 million is nothing compared to the damage that has been done by these videos that isis has created from these beheadings. to respond to senator kerry, i do want to respond saying i think there is a distinction when you are dealing with a rogue government and a rogue terrorist group. i think the u.s. government there have been many cases,
raymond davis in pakistan, a cia operative accused of murder. within weeks he was facing execution. there was a blood money paid to the family of the murdered. no one knew where the money came from. all i'm saying is when the u.s. government wants to get their people out whether cia operatives, military officials they find a way. they do it through back channels. i want the u.s. government to be more honest about its policy and safe guard the work of aid workers and journalists as much as it does cia and fbi operatives. in my own case working closely with the u.s. government i was privy to dozens of meetings in the white house and state department. because there is no consistent policy on how to deal with the hostage cases we saw finger pointing again and again. in the same day we meet with somebody in the state department and they say you have to go to the white house. we go to the white house and they send us back to the state department. what i want to see is a more consistent policy, less finger
pointing and less inaction. as we can see inaction leads to lost time and lost times leads to lost lives. >> thank you very much. well said. we hope everybody paid attention to that. it is more complicated than i thought. stating what is the united states position right now. we will be right back after this. the attendees at the summit oh, i love game night. ooh, it's a house and a car! so far, you're horrible at this, flo. yeah, no talent for drawing, flo. house! car! oh, raise the roof! no one? remember when we used to raise the roof, diane? oh, quiet, richard, i'm trying to make sense
the attendees at the summit have to come up with a better way to show unity than dressing the same. you are world leaders, not bridesmaids. if we have to dress like that when we go there when they come here they have to dress in traditional american garb. >> time for the side show. that was bill mahr. that wasn't the only photo op.
president obama also travelled to australia to meet with the leaders of the g-20. here is jimmy fallon on that gathering last night. >> at the g-20 summit this weekend politicians took a break from saving the world to do photoops. check out these world leaders who have never shaken hands before. >> what? >> put your hand on red, left hand on yellow. spin it. >> it seems like republicans and democrats disagree on just about everything these days. now a new study reveals the two parties differ when it comes to their first names. analyzes which names are hoar likely to belong to a member of one political party over another.
people named duane, dalton or brittany are more likely to be republicans while people named natasha ethan or dylan are more likely to be democrats. there is plenty of room in the middle. most names are pleasantly bipartisan. mitt romney reflects on his unsuccessful 2012 bid for president in a speech where he revealed new details about the kind of advice he got while campaigning. according to romney one supporter encouraged him to grow a beard so he could look in his words more sexy. >> one of the best and worst things about a campaign is you get a lot of advice. usually several times a day someone in an audience would hand me a letter with the 100% sure fire way for me to win an election. i was told to take bigger steps when i walk to show i'm young and athletic. another person said i should
stop shaving for a few days to look more sexy, as if i needed that. >> up next the round table in the big fights next week. president obama and the democrats win the first round but there is much more to come. and we are still expecting president obama's executive president obama's executive order. the conference call.
the ultimate arena for business. hour after hour of diving deep, touching base, and putting ducks in rows. the only problem with conference calls: eventually they have to end. unless you have the comcast business voiceedge mobile app. it lets you switch seamlessly from your desk phone to your mobile with no interruptions. i've never felt so alive. get the future of phone and the phones are free. comcast business. built for business.
an israeli policeman is the >> welcome back. time for the round table. we are going to dig into today's hot issues. first keystone vote and then to all kinds of things. the senate failed to get the 60 votes needed to go along with constructing the pipeline. this is the first skirmish in a series of epic battles and the president who is the leader of the democrats. president obama's ordered review of the u.s. hostage policy. some families members of hostages have criticized the obama administration for the no ransom stance.
the round table tonight consists of radio talk show host joe madison. susan page, i have known her forever. david cornen here. the keystone pipeline is red hot with people like senator. they are able to keep the vote from passing tonight. we have that pipeline if completed would be 125th of 1% of u.s. oil pipe lines in this country. why the heat on this issue? >> i really don't know other than you have i think environmentalists on one side that are arguing and then you have the big oil companies in the united states that are arguing. i read an article the other day where these mega oil barrens are saying it's too late. you should have done this six or eight years ago and there is a glut of oil already on the market. that's like gasoline. >> i like cheap oil but if you
are an investor you don't like it. >> one issue why it has become symbolic sort of bigger than it is because this is the opening of a certain type of oil exploration using oils that give off 17% more greenhouse emissions than conventional oil. the environmentalists said we have to try to stop this early in the process and they this is a type of oil exploration we have to prevent. for them it is not just what the pipeline is going to do but the fact that it is pioneering a new type of oil extraction. that is why they have so much. republicans made a big deal out of it because they inflate the jobs numbers. they found a baseball bat they thought they could hit obama with even though it is 50 full
time jobs after the two-year of constructing. >> let me go to you on this. it seems to me that this is like fracking. the further you go. nobody says we run out of anything. every time you go deeper and deeper or go to different sources or fracking to get the gas out you are making it more environmentally pollutive. you just are. if we were going to grab this stuff years ago we would have done it. we would get cheaper oil from other means. >> it is a more carbon intensive fuel. if it is largely a symbolic fight between environmentalists and republicans why have it? why not fight about things that are actually going to make an immediate difference on the environment or why not cut a deal that gives the approval for the keystone pipeline and gets concessions on some other thing that makes a difference. >> the "new york times" says he is up to that. he can stop it by vetoing it. they are not going to get the 290 votes in the house. >> they are going to get the 60 votes. >> not going to get 67. >> they are going to get to 60 in the new year.
they will send it to him and he vetoes it. why do we keep having big symbolic fights? >> because both sides like to fight. >> i theng the strategy here is to nip a certain technology in the bud. they will move the oil by truck or whatever or by rail. >> they might but that does increase the cost. the reason they want to do this is because it is cheaper and easier. if they take away those incentives particularly with the price of oil dropping world wide it makes this oil less attractive. >> let's talk about something very human. after i think i said this the other night when i see a beheading of an american on video if somebody put a button in front of me that says kill every isis fighter i would push it. i bounce around emotionally. it seems like a hopeless war. the iraqis are run by iranians. there is no syrian free army. we are pounding by air and our
guys are getting beheaded every couple of weeks. why not pay off? i'm asking it because we have to ask every question. we have a policy don't pay kidnapers. >> some countries do. but then here is the problem. if my child was taken -- >> you heard joan wallace say that. >> if my child was taken i would go how much. >> you would go to the koch brothers to get the money to save your kid. >> that is the point. what if they say i want 2 million. >> you go to anybody. >> if you mortgaged -- say you are a popular person in the neighborhood, everybody mortgage their house and you wouldn't have enough money and would never be able to pay it back. >> the person who wants the ransom is the one that sets the price. that's the thing. they have negotiated these deals.
there have been several journalists who have come out and have been very quiet about how they worked this out of afghanistan in particular. no doubt some news organizations have paid for journalists. and as sarah pointed out, too, when she got out with shane and her friend they were covered by the government which paid $1.5 million. i'm not sure it was a pass through but they knew they would get $1.5 million in chips from washington. we all understand the logic of that. we hope it means they don't grab more americans. there still is room for subactivity. >> you think they wouldn't pay them? >> i think they have and i think they would try to. >> doesn't the u.s. policy -- it is heartbreaking when you see these individuals. there is no question about that. would it serve larger interests if we negotiated with terrorists? wouldn't it help fund terrorist activities?
i abide the u.s. argument on this. maybe there should be a reduced value in taking hostage. >> what is the better pr for them, to behead people or take the money? >> behead people. the terror of beheading people. that is what has all of us talking about it. >> if we were paying ransom for americans and more got taken doesn't it help them, as well? >> we have become a cash cow for them. >> it comes back to what we can do to stop this. i don't know what obama and kerry and dempsey and others are thinking about when they get together. what is our policy to end this war successfully with isis? is there one? >> that's a big question because as you mentioned the free syrian army it seems to have collapsed at least in the north and the militia there they don't want to fight isis. they want to fight assad. we say we want to train them. we did -- the americans helped
and the iraqis and kurds. a long-term strategy here given all of the divisive elements that are intrafighting themselves seems nearly impossible. >> why don't we take the position of just leave? everybody leave. let them all fight themselves? >> that is a mood that they keep beheading people. >> get everybody out. >> i wonder how many missionaries are floating around in the towns. i don't know how much picking they can find of people to behead. >> isn't the lesson of 9/11 that you can't withdraw and expect there not to be repercussions for the united states and america? >> i agree with you. i am being somewhat sarcastic about it. >> red china was a reality. is isis going to become a reality?
as i said we will be talking to senator john mccain about his new book and his respect for america's fighting men and get to other news in that interview. we are back with our round table. let's talk about this president and what we are walking into this sort of storm. a very unpleasant storm. we will have a black/white issue coming up. probably we don't know what the verdict is.
a white cop and black teenager. it will be a hot one. we have the president throwing what some are calling a grenade. >> as i said, we will be talking with senator john mccane. some other big news. back with our round table, joe, susan and david. >> you're goirng to be living in a country where people recognize freedom, emancipation, the reality is he can't do much about ferguson. let's be very honest about that. he can be the moral leader. if we have disturbances. and i'm hoping we don't. if we had disturbances, he will go forward. look, you guys have got to stop. a peaceful demonstration is what we need. >> do you think holder did a good job? >> i think holder did an excellent job. i was there.
the biggest problem you have in ferguson are not the citizens, for the most part. it's provok xxs. who don't care about the president. they don't care about ferguson. they don't care about the media. they are just provok xxs. >> any time you have a situation of rifle, civil disruption. there's a certain kind of people that get in their car and arrive. they like that edginess. that license with bad behavior. >> at the same time, you need to make sure that the police there handle it the right way. and if there are provok xxs, that they are trained to sprat them. >> and that's what changed it in ferguson. >> that wasn't what happened in the beginning. >> it sounds like the authorities there know what they're doing. now. boy, it's a hard way to learn a lesson. >> maybe it's an opportunity to show that things are different from that first spade of demonstrations when you had that big, militarized response to peaceful demonstrations. you'll see. this is going to be a test.
>> you know, in the court system, back in another e the '50s, he was the dean of the court reporters. and he would tell me about the cops. he was no right winger. he would say when they had black kids and braught them in, they beat them up in the car. not that they weren't guilty of crime. they just beat them up in the car. >> on my show this morning x we talked about the fact that a young, black yoout will be killed 21 times more than a white teenager by a policeman in america. >> he faces a lot of danger. >> they're supposed to be teenagers. >> oh, i know. >> a big disparity in ferguson. we have a story in tomorrow's paper that shows 1600 police departments have disparities that are wider than that in ferguson across this country. >> is that just father-son, irish tradition of being police officers, fire fighters in new york. is it an african american rate
that's up to the population? for example, i don't get why the city there is so totally wliet and why the police force is stow tally white when you have a large, black community. >> or because of the politicians that run the city. kbauz people don't vote. that's kpraktly why. >> and kant dats don't run. >> people don't vote. people don't get politically engaged. i remember one argue. was when they started having city council meetings after the disturbances of the places packed. one man stood up and said look, i've been coming to these meetings and this is more people than i've seen in 30 years. >> listen, attorney general nominee, loretta lynch was involved in the case which wasn't that long ag. ferguson already had these problems. this has just been indemic. >> i mean, not everything is the same, but isn't that sort of story of the american history. community groups, ethnic groups, blacks were here before anybody,
but they get involved to protect themselves. you know the largest register of voets was in the history of philadelphia? frank rizzo. he was seen as anti-black. everybody registered. it was a higher percentage of black voters than whooit voters because of him. >> my first job was toe go into philadelphia and stop him from changing the city charter so he could run for consecutive terms. squl you succeeded. >> big time. >> he didn't get that third term. he kept running, though, right, at the end? i think protecting your community is one of the reasons why people vote. it's not to get ahead. it's to hold together. >> there's some self interest in voting. it holds us together. it's going to say that ferguson is not only not different from the rest of the country, it's not as bad as many as 1600. in theceps of a disparity in if rate of blacks and whites being arrested. you're three times more likely
to be arrested in ferguson if you're black than why. >> and then you have on the other side, the disparity in sentencing. which we talked about for a long time. and den cats on the congress and senate have addressed it, as well. >> it's not necessarily all racism. >> joe, good to see you. >> always. >> good luck in doing your part on this. congratulations, everybody. you'll be safely on the left. good luck with the newspaper tomorrow. when we return, let me finish the celebration for those opposing the cole stone public. it will be a good one today. you're watching "hardball", the place for politics. hey matt, what's up?
i'm just looking over the company bills. is that what we pay for internet? yup. dsl is about 90 bucks a month. that's funny, for that price with comcast business, i think you get like 50 megabits. wow that's fast. personally, i prefer a slow internet. there is something about the sweet meditative glow of a loading website. don't listen to the naysayer. switch to comcast business today
and get 50 megabits per second for $89.95. comcast business. built for business. let me finish tonight with a celebration for those celebrating the keystone pipeline. it looks like they'll be able to beat it again next year. the numbers are not there for an override of an expected veto by president obama. the vote got 59 senators today. they'll need 67 for a veto override. thanks to the voters, stl be back to the public. that's four plus 59, which makes the 6 p, four votes short of a veto override. in the house, there's no way they're anywhere near the 290 votes needed to override next year. it looks like president obama is the victor in the first round. it's always better to win the
first one. one. that's "hardball" for now. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. >> unfortunately, we came up one vote short on the keystone pipeline today. >> pipeline blocked. keystone proponents fall short in the senate. speaker of the house warned the president not to block the bill. >> 28d be e kwif lent of calling the american people stupid. >> then, bloodshed in jerusalem. four rabbis, including three americans, killed inside a synagogue. plus, protesters bracing for a decision in ferguson. and digging up dirt. an executive at ub, e rrksz suggests hiring a team to dig into the personal lives of his media critics. >> the culture of this company is so rotten.